象似性手势和指示性手势对自闭症儿童动作相关词汇学习的影响

本研究考察了自闭症儿童在象似性手势、指示性手势和无手势条件下的动作相关词汇的学习情况。选取三组语言水平匹配的高功能自闭症儿童,分别在象似性手势、指示性手势和无手势条件下进行动作相关词汇的学习。在第一次学习结束(T1)和最后一次学习结束2～3天后(T2)分别进行词汇理解和词汇命名测试。结果发现：(1)与其他手势类型相比,象似性手势对自闭症儿童的词汇理解有明显的促进作用;(2)无论哪个组别,学习次数的增加均有助于词汇学习成绩的提高;(3)对词汇命名,所有组别在短期学习条件下的表现都较差,但随着学习次数的增加,象似性手势对词汇命名的促进作用逐渐凸显。研究表明,象似性手势对自闭症儿童动作相关词汇的学习有一定的促进作用;命名任务下象似性手势的促进作用受到学习次数的调节,当学习次数足够多时,象似性手势的优势才得以体现;指示性手势对自闭症儿童动作相关词汇的学习并未表现出促进作用。     

婴儿指示性手势与其语言学习的关系

指示性手势是指明空间中某个物体、处所或事件的手部动作,在婴儿1岁时出现,与婴儿的语言学习存在着较强的相关,然而目前尚不清楚为什么会存在此相关。可能存在两种内在机制:(1)指示性手势影响婴儿的学习环境——引发了适时的语言输入;(2)影响学习者本身——帮助婴儿创造有效的学习状态并示意给他人。未来的研究需要探讨这两种机制如何交互作用,以及如何将指示性手势作为诊断或干预工具,用于识别和帮助有语言障碍风险的个体。     

语言伴随性手势是否和语言共享同一交流系统?

语言伴随性手势是人类语言交流的一个普遍的特征, 它可以发挥信息交流的功能。依据产生目的以及适用范围的不同, 手势可以分成表象性手势和非表象性手势。多数研究者认为, 语言和手势动作是“近亲”, 具有“家族相似性”。来自语言发展、认知心理学和认知神经科学的证据均表明, 手势和语言共享同一个交流系统。当手势动作和发音单词意义相同时, 手势动作受到单词发音的干扰, 同时引发发音共振峰2 (F2)的放大。手势和言语之间遵循互相作用理论, 它们作用的基础是语义一致性, 镜像神经系统完成了两者语义一致性的传递。由于语言伴随性手势和语言之间的关系是语言和行为结合良好的特例, 因此, 对语言伴随性手势的研究将有助于对人类心智有一个更深层次的认识和理解。     

交流手势认知理论

手势是交流互动中一种重要的非语言媒介, 手势不仅可以辅助语言交流而且具有独立的交流性; 作为和语言共同发生的非语言媒介, 手势交流有助于降低交流认知负荷。文章重点归纳和述评了基于手势和语言表达关系的交流手势理论、交流手势激活理论、交流手势的认知节省理论。未来研究需要进一步考虑交流手势实验研究情境自然性和控制严格性间的平衡, 交流手势和其他非语言因素间的关系, 交流手势认知研究的现实意义。     

手势认知功能研究的新视角：“空间化”手势假设

人类在说话或思考的时候常常伴随着手势。手势是在认知加工或交流过程中自动产生的, 具有表征性, 同时, 手势能够影响人类的认知加工。尽管研究者对手势的概念界定各有侧重, 但普遍认为手势不同于直接行动, 具有认知功能。手势认知功能的代表性理论模型有词汇索引模型、信息打包假设、表象保持理论、语义特殊性假设和嵌入/延展观。根据手势认知功能研究中主要自变量的不同, 可以把手势认知功能分成三种不同的研究范式, 即允许-限制手势的研究范式、侧重手势模式改变的研究范式、侧重情境改变的研究范式。今后值得关注的研究方向除了深入探讨手势认知功能的神经机制、加强对手势认知功能的干预研究外, 提出了建立更具解释力的手势认知功能的理论模型——“空间化”手势假设。     

手势认知功能研究的新视角：“空间化”手势假设

人类在说话或思考的时候常常伴随着手势。手势是在认知加工或交流过程中自动产生的,具有表征性,同时,手势能够影响人类的认知加工。尽管研究者对手势的概念界定各有侧重,但普遍认为手势不同于直接行动,具有认知功能。手势认知功能的代表性理论模型有词汇索引模型、信息打包假设、表象保持理论、语义特殊性假设和嵌入/延展观。根据手势认知功能研究中主要自变量的不同,可以把手势认知功能分成三种不同的研究范式,即允许-限制手势的研究范式、侧重手势模式改变的研究范式、侧重情境改变的研究范式。今后值得关注的研究方向除了深入探讨手势认知功能的神经机制、加强对手势认知功能的干预研究外,提出了建立更具解释力的手势认知功能的理论模型——"空间化"手势假设。     

儿童手势及其与学习的关系

手势是在交流或认知过程中产生的、不直接作用于物体的手部运动, 具有具体性和抽象性。其分类主要从手势的来源、手势的内容、手势的意图及手势和言语的匹配性等角度进行划分。不同类型手势在出现时间及发展趋势上存在差异。手势在儿童词汇学习、言语表达、数学问题解决、空间学习及记忆等方面起促进作用, 但对言语理解的影响未得出一致结论。未来可关注不同类型手势与儿童认知发展的关系及对比不同来源手势在各学习领域的优势情况。     

交流手势的认知特征

手势是语言交流过程中的一种重要的非语言媒介, 其不仅与语言互动间的关系密切, 而且具有不同的交流认知特征。文章重点归纳和述评了手势和语言交流的关系, 手势相对独立的交流特征, 教育情境中的手势交流。文章具体提出：首先, 手势和语言的共同表达促进了语言的发生和语言的理解、整合和记忆; 其次, 手势一定程度上具有独立的交流性, 手势和语言的“不匹配性”反映了交流信息的变化和交流认知的改变; 最后, 教育情境中教师的手势表达可以引导学生的注意并澄清语言信息, 学生的手势交流有助于促进学习认知过程。未来研究需要进一步探讨手势对于语言交流功能的影响, 语言交流过程中手势交流的优势特征和认知机制, 教育情境中手势交流高效性的认知机制, 手势交流的影响因素、一般特征和个体差异。     

时空隐喻的心理现实性:手势和手语的视角

早期有关时空隐喻表征心理现实性的研究因囿于有声语言而饱受批评,近年来兴起的手势和手语研究为该问题的证明提供了新的视角和证据。一方面,手势在三个空间维度上均可形成时空隐喻,有力地回应了反对派对概念隐喻理论在语言和概念层面循环论证的质疑;另一方面,手语空间运用的独特性以及文化图式的复杂性,导致其时空隐喻表现形式更为多样,为该领域研究提供了更加丰富的类型学证据。未来研究还应当注意心理学、语言学以及民族学等多学科的交汇融合,建立起概括力更强和系统性更完整的理论框架,将口语、手势和手语同时囊括其中。     

FN400效应:外显记忆测量中的概念启动加工

概念启动与熟悉性的研究是近年来内隐记忆与外显记忆神经机制研究的焦点领域之一。双加工理论支持者认为额区300~500 ms(FN400)新旧效应指示熟悉性。单加工理论支持者认为,双加工理论支持者在得出FN400效应指示熟悉性的结论时,没有考虑内隐记忆尤其是概念启动对外显记忆的污染。通过一系列分离熟悉性和概念启动的研究,Paller等人证明了FN400效应指示的是概念启动而不是熟悉性,并且,熟悉性由顶区500~800 ms(LPC)新旧效应来指示。目前,关于FN400效应反映了何种记忆加工仍然存在争议,未来研究需要探索分离熟悉性和概念启动的新方法,并进一步考察流畅性对熟悉性影响的神经机制。     

What is special about the index finger?: The index finger advantage in manipulating reflexive attentional shift1

Pointing with the index finger is a universal behavior. However, the functional significance of indexical pointing has not been examined empirically. We examined the efficacy of various pointing gestures in evoking viewer's attentional shifts. After viewing the gesture cue, observers quickly reported the location of a visual target. With a short cue‐target delay, reaction times were generally shorter for the target at the location where gesture cues pointed, but not with a long cue‐target delay. Moreover, the indexical pointing gesture produced a significantly larger cueing effect than the other gestures. Our control experiments indicated that the index‐finger advantage is tightly linked to the proper morphological shape (i.e. length and position of the index finger) of the indexical pointing and is not explained by the directional discriminability of the gesture. The visual system seems to use mechanisms that are partially independent of the directional discrimination of gestures, in order to quickly modulate the viewer's attention.     

I See Your Point: Infants Under 12 Months Understand That Pointing Is Communicative

Do young infants understand that pointing gestures allow the pointer to change the information state of a recipient? We used a third-party experimental scenario to examine whether 9- and 11-month-olds understand that a pointer's pointing gesture can inform a recipient about a target object. When the pointer pointed to a target, infants subsequently looked longer when the recipient selected the nontarget rather than the target object. In contrast, infants looked equally long whether the recipient selected the target or nontarget object when the pointer used a noncommunicative gesture, a fist. Finally, when the recipient had no perceptual access to the pointing gesture, infants looked longer when the recipient selected the target rather than the nontarget object. Young infants understand a fundamental aspect of the communicative function of pointing: Pointing, but not all gestures, can transfer information. Gestures may thus be one of the tools infants use for an early understanding of communication.     

Olive baboons communicate intentionally by pointing

A pointing gesture creates a referential triangle that incorporates distant objects into the relationship between the signaller and the gesture’s recipient. Pointing was long assumed to be specific to our species. However, recent reports have shown that pointing emerges spontaneously in captive chimpanzees and can be learned by monkeys. Studies have demonstrated that both human children and great apes use manual gestures (e.g. pointing), and visual and vocal signals, to communicate intentionally about out-of-reach objects. Our study looked at how monkeys understand and use their learned pointing behaviour, asking whether it is a conditioned, reinforcement-dependent response or whether monkeys understand it to be a mechanism for manipulating the attention of a partner (e.g. a human). We tested nine baboons that had been trained to exhibit pointing, using operant conditioning. More specifically, we investigated their ability to communicate intentionally about the location of an unreachable food reward in three contexts that differed according to the human partner’s attentional state. In each context, we quantified the frequency of communicative behaviour (auditory and visual signals), including gestures and gaze alternations between the distal food and the human partner. We found that the baboons were able to modulate their manual and visual communicative signals as a function of the experimenter’s attentional state. These findings indicate that monkeys can intentionally produce pointing gestures and understand that a human recipient must be looking at the pointing gesture for them to perform their attention-directing actions. The referential and intentional nature of baboons’ communicative signalling is discussed.     

A descriptive analysis of early word combinations in deaf children's signed utterances

The use of pointing and its place in word combinations and the organization of sentences were examined in children acquiring Japanese Sign Language as a first language. Subjects were three deaf children of signing deaf parents, and were aged from 1 year 9 months to 3 years 1 month at the time of observation. They were observed and videotaped periodically in free play settings. Pointing gestures were observed frequently in the earlier utterances in the development of sign language. It was also found that some pointing was referentially redundant and had a fixed position at the end of a sentence. This suggests that pointing, as well as being used referentially, plays a grammatical role in organizing the sentence.     

Effects of gesture and target on 12- and 18-month-olds' joint visual attention to objects in front of or behind them

Factors affecting joint visual attention in 12- and 18-month-olds were investigated. In Experiment 1 infants responded to 1 of 3 parental gestures: looking, looking and pointing, or looking, pointing, and verbalizing. Target objects were either identical to or distinctive from distractor objects. Targets were in front of or behind the infant to test G. E. Butterworth's (1991b) hypothesis that 12-month-olds do not follow gaze to objects behind them. Pointing elicited more episodes of joint visual attention than looking alone. Distinctive targets elicited more episodes of joint visual attention than identical targets. Although infants most reliably followed gestures to targets in front of them, even 12-month-olds followed gestures to targets behind them. In Experiment 2 parents were rotated so that the magnitude of their head turns to fixate front and back targets was equivalent. Infants looked more at front than at back targets, but there was also an effect of magnitude of head turn. Infants' relative neglect of back targets is partly due to the "size" of adult's gesture.     

A comparative approach to dogs’ (Canis familiaris) and human infants’ comprehension of various forms of pointing gestures

We investigated whether dogs and 2-, and 3-year-old human infants living, in some respects, in very similar social environments are able to comprehend various forms of the human pointing gesture. In the first study, we looked at their ability to comprehend different arm pointing gestures (long cross-pointing, forward cross-pointing and elbow cross-pointing) to locate a hidden object. Three-year-olds successfully used all gestures as directional cues, while younger children and dogs could not understand the elbow cross-pointing. Dogs were also unsuccessful with the forward cross-pointing. In the second study, we used unfamiliar pointing gestures i.e. using a leg as indicator (pointing with leg, leg cross-pointing, pointing with knee). All subjects were successful with leg pointing gestures, but only older children were able to comprehend the pointing with knee. We suggest that 3-year-old children are able to rely on the direction of the index finger, and show the strongest ability to generalize to unfamiliar gestures. Although some capacity to generalize is also evident in younger children and dogs, especially the latter appear biased in the use of protruding body parts as directional signals.     

A gray seal's (Halichoerus grypus) responses to experimenter-given pointing and directional cues

A gray seal (Halichoerus grypus) was trained to touch a target on its left or right by responding to pointing signals. The authors then tested whether the seal would be able to generalize spontaneously to altered signals. It responded correctly to center pointing and head turning, center upper body turning, and off-center pointing but not to head turning and eye movements alone. The seal also responded correctly to brief ipsilateral and contralateral points from center and lateral positions. Pointing gestures did not cause the seal to select an object placed centrally behind it. Like many animals in similar studies, this gray seal probably did not understand the referential character of these gestures but rather used signal generalization and experience from initial operant conditioning to solve these tasks.     

Comprehension and utilisation of pointing gestures and gazing in dog–human communication in relatively complex situations

The aim of the present investigation was to study the visual communication between humans and dogs in relatively complex situations. In the present research, we have modelled more lifelike situations in contrast to previous studies which often relied on using only two potential hiding locations and direct association between the communicative signal and the signalled object. In Study 1, we have provided the dogs with four potential hiding locations, two on each side of the experimenter to see whether dogs are able to choose the correct location based on the pointing gesture. In Study 2, dogs had to rely on a sequence of pointing gestures displayed by two different experimenters. We have investigated whether dogs are able to recognise an ‘indirect signal’, that is, a pointing toward a pointer. In Study 3, we have examined whether dogs can understand indirect information about a hidden object and direct the owner to the particular location. Study 1 has revealed that dogs are unlikely to rely on extrapolating precise linear vectors along the pointing arm when relying on human pointing gestures. Instead, they rely on a simple rule of following the side of the human gesturing. If there were more targets on the same side of the human, they showed a preference for the targets closer to the human. Study 2 has shown that dogs are able to rely on indirect pointing gestures but the individual performances suggest that this skill may be restricted to a certain level of complexity. In Study 3, we have found that dogs are able to localise the hidden object by utilising indirect human signals, and they are able to convey this information to their owner.     

Functions of the pointing gesture in mothers and their 12 to 36-month-old children during everyday activities

This study longitudinally examined the production of pointing in four Spanish 1-year-old and four Spanish 2-year-old children in interactive situations with their mothers at home over the course of one year. Three aspects were analyzed: a) the functions of the pointing gesture, their accurate comprehension by the interlocutor (mother or child), and their order of emergence in the child; b) whether or not there were differences in the production of pointing according to who initiated the interaction; and c) whether maternal and child speech were related to maternal and child pointing production. The results showed that the pointing function of showing is the most frequent for both children and mothers from groups 1 and 2, and the first to emerge followed by the informing, requesting object, requesting action, and requesting cooperation functions. The accuracy with which these intentions were comprehended was found to be very high for both mother and child. Pointing production was greater when the speaker initiated the interaction than when the other person did, indicating that gestures follow the turn-taking system. Finally, the production of pointing to showing in children and mothers was found to be related to maternal and child speech, while pointing to request cooperation triggered the process of joint activity between mother and child.     

Do pointing gestures by infants provoke comments from adults?

In the field of developmental psychology, there is speculation that pointing gestures by infants are good precursors of infant language acquisition, and some researchers have found correlations between these pointing gestures and some indices of language acquisition. Infants’ pointing gestures are presumably related to language acquisition because they provoke verbal responses from adults. To test this, seven boys and six girls were observed during free play time in a nursery classroom, and post-pointing and matched-control data were collected. Comparison between these data confirmed that the nursery staff spoke to infants at a significantly earlier stage in post-pointing sequences, compared with control sequences, indicating that pointing gestures elicit verbal responses from adult caregivers.